• rockettaco37@feddit.nu
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    19 hours ago

    This is an incredibly well written response and I apologize in advance if my response comes across as overly cynical or perhaps dismissive.

    My main concern with the complete abolition of private property is that unfortunately I don’t have enough trust in most governments to fairly distribute resources. Therefore I think a mixed market economy with a strong social welfare system is the most feasible method. Through this, we can gradually work towards socialist principles without completely alienating a large section of the populace. I don’t think a direct transition would be sustainable in the long term unfortunately.

    • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      18 hours ago

      Private ownership, directed for the purposes of profit, is inherently “unfair.” Markets have utility in finding demand at low levels of development, but in terms of accountability and fairness, directing production for the purposes of profit rather than the satisfaction of needs will always inherently trend towards conflict between workers and owners. Even the most benign “owner” is still going to be producing for profit, trying to maximize production and consumption, all in an incredibly inefficient manner in order to line their pockets.

      Collectivized production can be more transparent and directly accountable. Full abolition of private property into collectivized production and distribution is a gradual process, but it’s one that marches on as development continues. Since all markets are “mixed” right now, it remains important that we identify where the power lies in the system and ensure that’s in the hands of the working classes.